Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.990/2017

Case between Canara Bank vs Kadal Restaurant et al regarding realization of money

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-02-27
Duration
approximately-10 years 7 months
Case Closed
Thu, 02/27/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Canara Bank, is seeking repayment of a loan amounting to ₹2,70,818/- from the defendants, a partnership firm consisting of multiple managing partners. The defendants defaulted on the loan repayment and were set ex parte as they failed to appear in court.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to realize the loan amount along with interest and costs from the defendants. The defendants were found liable due to their failure to comply with the loan repayment agreement.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is allowed to realize ₹2,70,818/- together with interest at the rate of 12.20% per annum until realization.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to realize the loan amount along with interest and costs from the defendants. The defendants were found liable due to their failure to comply with the loan repayment agreement.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence proving the defendants owed the loan amount as claimed, and the defendants were set ex parte.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence proving the defendants owed the loan amount as claimed, and the defendants were set ex parte.
Supporting Evidence
From the available evidences, the plaintiff bank is entitled for a decree for realization of the plaint amount with interest. The evidence of the plaintiff is unchallenged because the defendants were set ex parte.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹2,70,818/- together with future interest at the rate of 12.20% per annum with monthly rests from 01/12/2016 till the date of decree.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kadal Restaurant
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vibindas
Party Age
32
Relation
S/o E.R.Mohandas
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sunil Baby
Party Age
30
Relation
S/o P.V. Baby
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
A.J. Jaimon
Party Age
34
Relation
S/o Johnson
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Thomas Raphel
Party Age
37
Relation
S/o Raphel
Plaintiffs Documents
Loan Application, Agreement Cum Deed of Hypothecation, Sanction Memorandum, Guarantee Agreement with covering letter, Statement of Account, Copy of Advocate Notice, Acknowledgment card, Copy of Partnership Deed
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. S.Reena
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹2,70,818/- together with future interest.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹2,70,818/- together with future interest.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 12.20% per annum.
Evidence:
2. Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 12.20% per annum with monthly rests from 01/12/2016 till the date of decree.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise future interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
Evidence:
3. Plaintiff is allowed to realise future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realisation.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to recover the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
4. Plaintiff is allowed to realise the costs of the suit from the defendants and their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Loan Application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted by the defendants as part of the loan process.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Agreement cum deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed by the defendants indicating their agreement to the loan terms.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sanction Memorandum
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document affirming the approval of the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Guarantee Agreement with covering letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to the guarantee provided for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details of the loan repayment status.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Copy of Advocate Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Legal notice issued for loan repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of receipt related to communications by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Copy of Partnership Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document establishing the partnership for the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A8

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Canara Bank vs Kadal Restaurant et al regarding realization of money
Case Code Year
Case between Canara Bank vs Kadal Restaurant et al regarding realization of money

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Tue, 07/01/2014 - 12:00
Case Closed
Thu, 02/27/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Shibu.V et al regarding realisation of money
THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Velamkanni Matha JLG Vizhinjam Unit et al regarding realization of money.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Ayodhya Kudumbasree et al regarding recovery of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Sreereshmi C R, Remadevi P regarding realisation of money
COURT OF I st ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jyothish Kumar N regarding realisation of money
Court of I st Additional Munsiff
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won